Re: slow server - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | Rod Taylor |
---|---|
Subject | Re: slow server |
Date | |
Msg-id | 02b301c0bc72$c2d31180$1600a8c0@jester Whole thread Raw |
In response to | slow server (Marc Wrubleski <mlwruble@sorexsoftware.com>) |
List | pgsql-general |
Probably more to do with the kernel that compiled Postgres and the flags used. -O versus -O2, etc. Just for kicks, can you try with 7.1? BTW, did you vacuum both databases shortly before running the queries, and what happens in a repeated running (say table was in cache for one system and not on the other). I also notice a rather significant different in operating system as a whole. -- Rod Taylor There are always four sides to every story: your side, their side, the truth, and what really happened. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc Wrubleski" <mlwruble@sorexsoftware.com> To: <pgsql-general@postgresql.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 3:10 PM Subject: Re: [GENERAL] slow server > More info on this problem ... > > The Query: select acc.expiringCredits, acc.earnedCredits, > acc.purchasedCredits, > acc.statusid, acc.expired from accounts acc, gateways g where > g.gwnumber = '02000000' and g.accountid = acc.accountid ; > _________________ > - PIII system. (returns results in .75 seconds per query) > PostgreSQL 7.0.3 on i686-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by gcc egcs-2.91.66 > > running on RedHat 6.2 (with Kernel 2.2.16) > > Merge Join (cost=8.30..80.93 rows=100 width=25) > -> Index Scan using accounts_accountid_key on accounts acc > (cost=0.00..60.00 rows=1000 width=21) > -> Sort (cost=8.30..8.30 rows=10 width=4) > -> Index Scan using gateways_gwnumber_key on gateways g > (cost=0.00..8.14 rows=10 width=4) > ________________ > Celeron system (returns results in .002 seconds per query) > PostgreSQL 7.0.2 on i686-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by gcc 2.96 > > running on RedHat 7.0 > > Merge Join (cost=8.30..80.93 rows=100 width=25) > -> Index Scan using accounts_accountid_key on accounts acc > (cost=0.00..60.00 rows=1000 width=21) > -> Sort (cost=8.30..8.30 rows=10 width=4) > -> Index Scan using gateways_gwnumber_key on gateways g > (cost=0.00..8.14 rows=10 width=4) > > I hope this can shed light somewhere. I'm need a starting point where I > should start looking. I don't understand why Postgres 7.03 would be so much > slower than 7.02. > > Marc > > Tom Lane wrote: > > > Marc Wrubleski <mlwruble@sorexsoftware.com> writes: > > > Hi, I have two systems one is a 500Mhz Celeron with 128 MB ram and IDE > > > Disks, the other is 800Mhz PIII, 512MB RAM, SCSI Disks. > > > > > Obviously the PIII should stomp on the performance of the Celeron, but > > > my postgres installation on the faster system is MUCH slower. > > > > > I simple query on two tables joined on the celeron takes about .002 > > > seconds. On the PIII it takes .75 seconds. Same Query, same tables, same > > > indexes. The results from explain are the same. the results from the > > > query are the same. > > > > > Any Ideas? > > > > You've managed to tell us absolutely *nothing* of value here. What > > Postgres version, what queries, what query plans exactly? > > > > > One thing to think about is the PIII was installed via RPM and the > > > Celeron wass compiled on that machine. Could this be the limiting > > > factor? > > > > Kinda makes me wonder if they are different PG versions and/or different > > configuration options ... > > > > regards, tom lane > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command > > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org) > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org) >
pgsql-general by date: